(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Berachos 21

1) What is the source for ...

(a) ... Bensching after bread?

(b) ... the Berachach before Torah-study?

2) How does Rebbi Yochanan attempt to obligate ...
(a) ... a Berachah *after* Torah-study from Bensching?

(b) ... a Berachah *before* eating bread from Birchas ha'Torah?

(c) Why is neither Kal va'Chomer acceptable?

(d) How does the Gemara also refute Rebbi Yochanan's contention from our Mishnah?

3) According to Rav Yehudah, someone who is uncertain whether he recited the Shema or not, is Patur from 'repeating' it, whereas the same Safek with regard to 'Emes ve'Yatziv' would obligate him to repeat it.
(a) Why is that?

(b) How does Rav Yehudah explain the Pasuk "u've'Shochbecha, u've'Kumecha"?

(c) Then why is a Ba'al Keri obligated to think *the Shema*, but not '*Emes ve'Yatziv*'?

Rebbi Elazar disagrees. According to him, in case of doubt, one *is* obligated to repeat the Shema.
(d) What is his Machlokes with Rebbi Yochanan regarding someone who is not sure whether, or not, he has Davened the Amidah?
(a) What is the difference between someone who remembers - in the middle of the Amidah - that he has already Davened, and someone who is in the middle of the weekday Amidah, when he remembers that it is Shabbos?

(b) Why the difference?

The author of the former Halachah is Shmuel, who also stated that someone who enters Shul and finds there a Minyan already Davening the Amidah, may not Daven again (in order to Daven Tefilah be'Tzibur), unless he is able to add something new to the Amidah.
(c) In view of the former statement, why did he need to issue the latter one?

(d) In view of the latter statement, why did he need to issue the former one?

Answers to questions


5) According to Rav Huna, someone who enters Shul and finds the community in the middle of the Amidah, may join them, provided he is able to terminate the Amidah in time to say Modim with the community.

(a) Why?

(b) Why does he disagree with Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi, in whose opinion he should only begin the Amidah if he will be able to say the Kedushah with the community?

(c) In this regard, what do we learn from the Pasuk in Vayikra "ve'Nikdashti be'Soch Benei Yisrael". What is the complete Derashah?

In any event, one does not interrupt the Amidah for Kedushah.
(d) Does one interrupt the Amidah in order to answer 'Amein Yehei Shemei Raba' ... ?
6) According to Ben Azai, we learn the penalty of stoning by a witch, from the fact that it is placed next to bestiality, which we already know, is Chayav Sekilah.
(a) What does Rebbi Yehudah comment on that, and from where does *he* learn the penalty of stoning by a witch?

(b) What does Rebbi Yehudah learn from the juxtaposition in Devarim of the Pesukim "Lo Yikach Ish es Eishes Aviv, ve'Lo Yegaleh Kenaf Aviv" and "ve'Nasan ha'Ish ha'Shochev Imah" (in connection with a man who has raped a girl)?

There is a discrepancy between the way Rebbi Yehudah learns in (a), and the way he learns in (b).
(c) What do we learn from it?

(d) What is now the problem, with Rebbi Yehudah in our Mishnah, who learns that a Ba'al Keri is permitted to Daven and recite Berachos, in view of the juxtaposition of the Pesukim in Devarim "ve'Hoda'ata la'Vanecha ve'Livnei Vanecha" and "Yom Asher Amadta Lifnei Elokecha ..."?

(e) How does the Gemara resolve this difficulty?

7) In a Mishnah at the end of the Perek, Rebbi Yehudah exempts a Zav (who is not subject to the above Tevilah) who afterwards saw Keri, or a Nidah (who has the Din of a Zav in this regard), who then exuded Zera, and a woman who saw blood after being Meshameshes.
(a) How does the Gemara prove from here that Rebbi Yehudah agrees on principle, with the prohibition of a Ba'al Keri to learn Torah before he has Toveled?

(b) What is the discrepancy between this statement, and that of Rebbi Yehudah in the previous Mishnah 'Mevarech Lifneihem u'le'Achareihem'?

(c) How does the Gemara initially reconcile the discrepancy, by amending his first statement?

(d) Why is this explanation unacceptable?

(e) Then how *does* the Gemara resolve the problem?

Answers to questions

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,